Gruesome gang killing in Maryland: why isn't it an act of "terrorism"?

Forums:

Seems they took intentional measures to insure the killing would be remarkable in so far as perhaps instilling terror within those who hear about it.  How is this group/gang any different than "isis" in this regard?  However, I can't find any indication the suspects will be charged with "terrorism".

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/police-ms-13-members-...

As many as 10 members of the MS-13 street gang lured a man into a park in Wheaton, Md., spoke with one another over walkie-talkies as he arrived, stabbed him more than 100 times, decapitated him and then cut out his heart, according to police documents made public Wednesday in Montgomery County District Court.

 

Playing dumb eh? 

Not sure about playing dumb, but I suppose it is a "loaded" question.

I believe freedom of thought is one of the few "absolute" freedoms & "terrorism" laws (akin to "hate crimes") unnecessarily pile on an additional layer of charges to target the "content of the mind" while the action committed is sufficient to press charges upon without any need for "psychoanalysis" to be injected into the criminal sphere.

I read the article.  They are just teenagers,  or "Dreamers" if you will.  Anyway gangs fall more under RICO territory,  not terrorism.

>> Seems they took intentional measures to insure the killing would be remarkable in so far as perhaps instilling terror within those who hear about it.  <<

>>while the action committed is sufficient to press charges upon without any need for "psychoanalysis" to be injected into the criminal sphere. <<

Because it wasn’t politically motivated.

You’re welcome.

Because it wasn’t politically motivated<<<

Are you saying that "terrorism" requires a political motivation for it be terrorism?

Yes.  Words have meanings and there’s this awesome thing called the dictionary that has the definitions of words.  

<<<Are you saying that "terrorism" requires a political motivation for it be terrorism?

In Trump speak it requires a Muslim

Do you actually believe it matters to the family of someone killed whether an MS-13 member holds up the decapitated head of a victim on a video and utters X string of words vs. Isis doing the same thing, but says Y string of words?

lol 

 

No the family will still be upset but it doesn’t change the definition of terrorism.

Do you really not understand how words work?

<<<Are you saying that "terrorism" requires a political motivation for it be terrorism?

In Trump speak it requires a Muslim<<<

He's clearly stoking a very deep seeded undercurrent of religious intolerance, yet the vast majority of the population (i.e. little timmy) are willing to surf along on the tops of the waves - blissfully unaware of the inconsistencies with respect to very nebulous legal paradigm that ultimately restricts freedom of thought when there already exists plenty of legal instruments to pursue "evil doers".

Do you really not understand how words work?<<<

sticks and stones

So that’s a no?

You can be terrorized by something that is not an act of terrorism.  Weird huh?  

Why don’t we call Busses Planes?  They both transport a similar amount of people.

We do it's called an Airbus...

Why don’t we call busses landplanes?

What are political motives? 

So why did they bury the body?

You can be terrorized by something that is not an act of terrorism.  Weird huh?<<<

^ this alludes to the crux of the matter.

A little old lady might be "terrorized" at the site of a 6-5" individual who's dressed like a gang member walking toward her on the sidewalk in LA, yet she might feel more at ease if same individual dressed in an Armani suit.   What if Armani suit guy sucker punches her at the last second as they pass one another, yet gang clad individual made a big show of trying to envoke fear from old lady as he approached and then followed up by punching her.   Should additional charges be leveled against gang colors guy because he purposely envoked "terror", yet Armani suit guy should receive a lesser charge because he "saved" old lady from mental anguish?

What are political motives? <<<

Likewise, what is "political"?

Neither of the two scenarios you just made up are an act of terrorism despite the old lady being terrorized.

Again, check out a dictionary if you’re having a hard time understanding what certain words mean.

I get it:  "keep checking elsewhere because I won't address your points directly".

No you rarely seem to get most things.  

I’m just not going to google the definitions of words you’re having a hard time with for you.  You know.  Give a man a fish yadda yadda.

Oh Jesus Christ 

rinse and repeat

What is bolognese?

Mr. Hoover is afraid to address FOM directly. Sad.

Goddamnit Nedb quirt teillong meeeeee22222

two good eyes, but

Dropped four flights and cracked my skull, what’s the definition of political

Alfred Hitchcock, Osama bin Laden = two terrorists, RIGHT?

Aristotle wrote countless pages divided into several "volumes" on the topic of politics and you want a "Google definition"?  Hopefully, you are just trolling on this ... because it's back to "two good eyes" if you really believe any comprehensive definition of politics can be effectively delivered in a sentence or two.

^ and this is all a digression from whether "terrorism" necessarily needs to be "politically" motivated (in some sense of the word).